Neptium
BenarNews (US Funded Media) - US officials to discuss with Malaysia ‘potential impact’ of Iran sanctions’ violations
Treasury Department says it’s concerned about Washington-sanctioned Iranian oil being moved from ship to ship in Southeast Asian waters.
A U.S. Treasury delegation will discuss the consequences of allowing transshipments of Washington-sanctioned Iranian oil in meetings with government officials here this week, amid longtime allegations by Western news and research firms that Malaysia permits Iran to use its waters for ship-to-ship petroleum transfers.
Western news
YOU YOURSELF ARE WESTERN NEWS? 
…The American officials who arrived in Kuala Lumpur late on Monday will engage in blunt discussions with their Malaysian counterparts, U.S. Ambassador Edgard Kagan said on the sidelines of Asia’s largest defense show.
“You brown orientals need to listen to the White Man and stop trading with the Islamofascist Terrorists”
“We are confident that the Malaysian government understands the U.S. position with regard to transshipment of oil that has been sanctioned, and understands the potential impact that this could have,” Kagan said in response to a question about whether Washington sees Malaysia as a transshipment hub for Iranian oil.
These Crakkkers need to STFU. Keep swinging buddy, it’ll just encourage further decoupling from the West.
He did not elaborate on what he meant by “potential impact,” which could mean anything from sanctions on Malaysia to an emboldened Iran potentially causing more trouble for Washington.
Sanctions deny people or companies access to assets within the United States and prevent American citizens or financial institutions from doing business with them.
Don’t know how that concerns people in Southeast Asia but okay
“We look forward to candid and frank discussions that are going to be done very much from our standpoint in the spirit of working together to address a common problem,” Kagan said.
Go ahead and sanction. I don’t think the numerous American companies based in Malaysia are gonna react too kindly to the political machinations of the warmongers affecting their bottomline.
common problem
It clearly ain’t a problem for the numerous local businesses benefiting from trade with Iran.
In December, the U.S Treasury Department imposed sanctions on four Malaysia-based companies it accused of helping Iran’s production of drones. Washington accuses Iran of supplying deadly drones to what it says are terrorist proxies in the Middle East, and to Russia for use in Ukraine.
Only four? The companies in Malaysia need to step up their game.
On Friday, the Treasury Department said that two of its top officials would visit Malaysia and Singapore on May 6-9 to advance its work in countering what it called terror financing by Iran and its proxies, and the implementation of sanctions against Russia.
Only Singapore has imposed sanctions on Russia. The USA is not in the position to dictate how an independent country wants to handle their own trade and diplomatic relations. Fuck off 
“In Malaysia, Under Secretary Nelson and General Counsel MacBride will discuss the United States’ efforts to disrupt terrorist financing, including through fundraising for fraudulent charities and illicit oil sales, while ensuring that U.S. sanctions and other financial measures do not impede the flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza.”
efforts to disrupt terrorist financing, including fundraising for fraudulent charities
We should ban the New Endowment for Democracy to be in line with the stated objectives.
humanitarian aid
Such as “lethal aid” for Israel mayhaps? 
BenarNews contacted the Prime Minister’s Office and the foreign ministry for comment on the U.S. officials’ visit and Kagan’s comments, but did not immediately hear back.
I don’t think they care to respond to US propaganda outlets. 
Both the issues – sanctions against Russia and Iran – have seen the East and the West divided in their responses.
No shit.
…Malaysia has taken a stance supporting Iran, which launched drones and fired missiles at Israel on April 13. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim described Iran’s actions as a “legitimate act” in response to Israel’s “barbarous” attack on Iran’s consulate in Damascus.
This is the opinion of the Global Majority.
‘I will not accept any threats’ …He said in November that Malaysia would maintain ties with Hamas and not be cowed by the threat of “unilateral” sanctions for doing so in the face of a proposed U.S. law to sanction the group’s supporters. He was responding to the Nov. 1 passage by the U.S. House of Representatives of the Hamas and Other Palestinian Terrorist Groups International Financing Prevention Act. It has yet to be passed by the Senate. “I will not accept any threats, including this,” Anwar said in Parliament back then. “This action is unilateral and not valid because we, as members of the United Nations, only recognize decisions made by the United Nations Security Council.”
I have covered this before but I’ll repeat again: Anwar faces internal opposition from more radical Islamic political factions that are staunchly pro-Palestine and Anti-Zionist. Even if he wasn’t himself a believer of a modernist Islam, it would be political suicide if he did not take a stance for Hamas.
The government’s position is entirely in line with the opinion of the vast majority in Malaysia.
In December, Malaysia banned Israeli shipping company ZIM, vessels flying the Israeli flag and those headed there from docking at its ports, saying the move was a response to the Jewish state’s actions in Gaza.
Is the article trying to imply hypocrisy here? Lmao.
Washington ups the pressure Still, allegations about Malaysia’s support for Iran evasion of U.S. sanctions have been made for years, and long before the latest crisis in the Middle East. More recently, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (USEIA), in September, noted that China’s oil imports from Malaysia in the first half of 2023 rose to 1 million barrels a day – a figure that exceeded total production in Malaysia.
Actually maybe Malaysia increased production imo I think we are rushing too much on our conclusions. 
USEIA pointed to a May 2021 article from the Washington-based Middle East Institute’s website to explain this discrepancy. The article was titled “Iranian sanctions evasion and the Gulf’s complex oil trade,” and cited news sources like Bloomberg and Reuters as well. “With a heavy discount on Iran’s high-risk, illegal oil exports, buyers in China are purchasing so much that oil tankers are ‘clogging up’ ports in the country,” the article said, referring to a Bloomberg News story for the information about the choked ports.
Thank you China, very cool. 
The Treasury officials’ visit to Malaysia comes less than two weeks after President Joe Biden signed a national security package that included the “21st Century Peace through Strength Act,” which extends the statute of limitations for violations of sanctions to 10 years.
“Peace through Strength Act” sounds like satire 
In a recent article for The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, research assistant Rebecca Redlich wrote that “Kuala Lumpur is once again displaying its willingness to facilitate Iran’s illicit activity.”
It’s the free market at work baby. The invisible hand supports Iran and Hamas, what can I say?
“The United States has repeatedly sought to curb Kuala Lumpur’s growing ties with Iran by sanctioning various Malaysia-based entities,” she said in her article dated April 24.
Ya’ll repeating what the colonizers did 300 years ago and think no one here will see the ploy for what it is.
“U.S. officials have focused most of their outreach and punitive actions on areas where Malaysian decisions directly threaten U.S. objectives, such as facilitating illicit Iranian oil sales and creating a permissive environment for sanctions evasion.”
So much for the free and open trade and markets.
Again - why should Malaysia care if what they do threaten US objectives? Should a Global South country not advocate for and do stuff that is in their best interests?
Death to Amerikkka 
SEA Headlines
It’s that time of the week.
The Nation Thailand - Thai school breaks barriers, grants hairstyle freedom to LGBTQ+
VNA - Rail route connects China, Laos, Thailand, Malaysia
The Bangkok Post - Thai official helps steer Asean in negotiations with China
Reuters - Indonesia's Q1 GDP growth beats forecasts, but outlook's uncertain
CNA - China’s hybrid rice might be Indonesia’s latest solution to improving its food security, but at what costs?
Vietnam Investment Review - ASEAN encouraged to embrace global flows
Pattaya Mail - ‘ASEAN Plus Three’ bolsters financial safety nets amid challenges
The Star - Leveraging China’s GDI to revitalise Malaysia’s industrial sector
Paywalled Article
SINCE the early 1990s, Malaysia has been exhibiting signs of premature deindustrialisation, characterised by a decline in the relative contribution of the manufacturing sector to the economy – a trait typically observed only when a country has attained the status of a developed country.
In 2022, the manufacturing industry contributed only 23.4% to the country’s gross domestic product (GDP), down from a peak of 30.9% in 1999. The main culprits behind this phenomenon are lack of quality investment, limited spending on research and development (R&D) and high dependence on imported low-skilled labour.
These have collectively led to the country’s inability to join the high value-added segment of the manufacturing value chain.
The Global Development Initiative (GDI) proposed by Chinese President Xi Jinping in September 2021 presents a promising opportunity for resurrecting Malaysia's industrial sector via the industrialisation priority area.
Under this priority area, the GDI aims to: enhance collaboration in worldwide production capabilities; assist developing nations in enhancing their industrial production capabilities and manufacturing standards; facilitate their seamless integration into global industrial, value, and supply networks; and expedite the process of industrialisation and modernisation.
In the 2023 GDI progress report, published by the Center for International Knowledge on Development, the GDI has helped developing countries advance sustainable industrialisation and resolve development bottlenecks.
This is done through three channels.
Firstly, the GDI has established a global network of partners encompassing think tanks, international organisations and multilateral institutions, universities and industry alliances and associations. Secondly, there is strengthening of financial support and policy coordination via Chinese investments in developing countries and cooperation on Industry 4.0 as well as digital transformation. Thirdly, the GDI is supporting the training and capacity building of talent for industrialisation by drawing focus on vocational education. In a bid to revitalise the country’s industrial sector, Malaysia could leverage the GDI to attract foreign direct investment and technology transfer. Chinese investment in Malaysia's industrial parks and special economic zones could facilitate the inflow of capital and expertise, contributing to the modernisation and expansion of the industrial sector. This collaboration could lead to the transfer of advanced manufacturing technologies, ultimately elevating Malaysia's industrial capabilities and competitiveness on the global stage. Two of the 12 key challenges outlined in the New Industrial Master Plan (NIMP) 2030 are stagnating labour productivity, as well as shortage and skills mismatch among local talent. To circumvent these issues, Malaysia can proactively engage in collaborative initiatives with China to enhance skills development and knowledge transfer. By fostering partnerships in R&D, innovation and skills training, Malaysia can ensure that its workforce is equipped with the expertise needed to drive industrial growth in the era of digitalisation and automation. The NIMP 2030’s aim to expand Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) is also in line with the GDI’s focus on vocational education. A remarkable example of a successful partnership between China and Malaysia is the acquisition of Malaysia’s national car brand Proton by Zhejiang Geely Holding Group in 2017, where the two partners have made great strides in working together. Apart from elevating the brand image and sales of the local carmaker, the signing of various joint ventures, technical assistance, foreign direct investment and technical collaboration agreements between the two countries have greatly benefitted local Malaysian dealers with access to new and advanced technologies, while Chinese suppliers have found new sources of raw parts. Meanwhile, another success story is the setting up of the Malaysia-China Kuantan Industrial Park (MCKIP) in Gebeng which has attracted more than 50 international companies and created more than 10,000 jobs for locals. It is worth mentioning that of the RM11.01bil in foreign direct investment that Pahang attracted as of 2022, more than half was contributed by China. These success stories indicate that it is essential for Malaysia to strategically position itself to maximise the benefits of participating in the GDI. This involves formulating inclusive policies, streamlining regulatory processes, and addressing any potential challenges associated with the influx of Chinese investments. By doing so, Malaysia can create an environment that is conducive to sustainable industrial development while safeguarding its national interests. The potential revitalisation of Malaysia's industrial sector through the GDI is not without its considerations. It is imperative for Malaysia to carefully assess the economic, environmental and social impacts of various projects to ensure that they align with the country's long-term development goals and sustainability agenda. Additionally, robust governance frameworks and transparency measures should be put in place to mitigate the risks associated with large-scale infrastructure and industrial development efforts. In conclusion, Malaysia stands to gain substantial advantages by capitalising on the opportunities presented by the GDI. The initiative has the potential to inject momentum into Malaysia's industrial sector, address the challenges of deindustrialisation, and propel the country towards productivity-led growth. By embracing strategic collaborations with China and leveraging the GDI’s multifaceted offerings, Malaysia can position itself as a key beneficiary of the initiative and revitalise its industrial landscape for sustained prosperity.
Al Mayadeen English - Time, Space, and the Will
Those who have a connection to the land, and who know its every intimate corner will always have the advantage, even in the face of imperialist terror
Journalist Antony Lowenstein wrote a book called “The Palestine Laboratory'', which details how the Zionist entity uses Palestine as a testing ground for their weapons which they sell to other merchants of death worldwide. In this article, I want to flip this laboratory analogy on its head, by showing how Palestine is where 21st-century guerilla warfare is being developed strategically and tactically. First, there will be a survey of a few 20th-century guerilla warfare tacticians such as Mao and Vo Nguyen Giap, who laid the ground for the Palestinian fedayeen of the 1960s and 1970s. Then, a piece of writing from the martyr Basel al Araj titled Live Like a Porcupine, Fight Like a Flea will be analyzed alongside the actions of resistance factions against the Zionist garrison state.
In reference to the advances of the Vietnamese People’s Army against the French and American imperialists, General Vo Nguyen Giap argued that “in the face of an enemy as powerful as he is cruel, victory is possible only by uniting the whole people within the bosom of a firm and wide national front based on the worker-peasant alliance”. While General Giap is undoubtedly a master tactician of the previous generation, the rank and file of the people’s army showed how correct his analyses are in practice. The question of land remains the decisive factor in planning and executing guerilla warfare.
Those who have a connection to the land, and who know its every intimate corner will always have the advantage, even in the face of imperialist terror. The Vietnamese People’s Army–under the leadership of Ho Chi Minh and General Giap–used the terrain to set traps for imperialist troops, but also to be able to mesh with the masses of workers and peasants. The types of traps used included false floors with snake pits underneath, nets to corral foreign troops into ambushes, spike traps that injured imperialist troops and sent them to the injured reserve. The point was never to confront the enemy face-to-face and inflict massive casualties, but to wear them out, spread them thin, and expose their barbarity. This also included nationwide programs of patriotic education and organization towards national unity and independence. General Giap continues: “Guerilla war is the war of the broad masses…is the enemy strong? One avoids him. Is he weak? One attacks him…there is no fixed line of demarcation, the front being wherever the enemy is found”.
Besides the uses of time and space, the will of the Vietnamese people in their revolutionary war was quite a decisive factor against imperialist troops far from their homes. In the words of Ho Chi Minh: “It was patriotism…that inspired me. You will kill ten of us, we will kill one of you, but in the end, you will tire of it first. Remember, the storm is a good opportunity for the pine and the cypress to show their strength and their stability”. The question of supplying weapons in a hostile environment was also a key struggle. General Giap points out that this was mainly done through acquiring arms as ‘war booty’ and then training in their use for the next battle. This strategy is one which was exemplified in Operation Al Aqsa Flood, as discussed later. Mao Zedong and the People’s Liberation Army are another example of 20th century guerilla warriors who struck great blows against world imperialism.
Like Vietnam, China’s PLA were very inspirational to the Palestinian fedayeen. Many photos can be found of PFLP commandos engaged in study sessions of Mao’s Red Book. In modern China, author Cixin Liu’s gripping sci-fi series “The Three Body Problem” pits humanity against an invading alien force who compares humans to bugs due to our relative technological inferiority. It is only when the humans realize that bugs have never been eradicated despite anyone’s efforts that their intergalactic guerilla warfare gains potency and vitality. On guerilla warfare, Mao says: “the enemy advances, we retreat; the enemy camps, we harass; the enemy tires, we attack; the enemy retreats, we pursue”. The Palestinian martyr-intellectual Basel al Araj terms this ‘the flea war’.
Al Araj seamlessly weaves together an ecological analysis of the porcupine and the flea with a political-economic analysis of guerilla warfare in his piece Live Like a Porcupine, Fight Like a Flea. In regards to the flea, Al Araj points out that fleas do not kill their host through biting them and making them anemic, but rather the flea exhausts the host and spreads them thin physically and psychologically. As for the porcupine, the author describes this animal as one which is popular in Palestinian folklore, “[Palestinians] describe it as a strange creature; it cries and wails like humans, it has hopes and wishes. It's been likened to humans in that when upset, it directs its spikes towards predators in an attempt to strike them”. As for the defenses of the porcupine, beyond its spikes, Al Araj highlights that “porcupines are night animals that live underground in relatively large holes that connect to a network of tunnels, where it also creates rest spots.
The porcupine uses various techniques to get in and out of its hole”. In a world-historical sense, then, we can see that the Palestinian resistance is advancing the theory and practice of guerilla warfare for the 21st century. In the absence of jungle or forested mountains in Gaza, the resistance has tunneled underground, like the porcupine, and have created an entire network of tunnels which bypass enemy positions and allow for the use of time and space to our people’s advantage.
The tunnels of the resistance allow for the advancement of the ‘flea war’, whereby Hamas, PIJ, or PFLP commandos can attack over a large surface area while remaining in small units. This has done immense damage materially and psychologically to the Zionist enemy, especially since October 7th. This is evidenced by Gaza being littered with Merkavas and Zionist APCs which are no longer in use. In regards to General Giap’s insistence on the importance of ‘war booty’, time and evidence have shown that Operation Al Aqsa Flood was so successful in part because there were many Hamas units disguised as Zionist troops and using Zionist armaments which caused confusion among Zionist ranks. Palestinians have also reverse engineered the missiles dropped on Gaza, so unwittingly, the Zionists arm the revolutionary forces.
In the West Bank as well, the actions of groups like Lion’s Den and the Jenin Brigades express another expression of the ‘flea war’ whereby Zionist troops are lured into mazes of alleys, harassed and corralled by youth with stones and Molotov cocktails until they arrive at a set location where they are ambushed by light, mobile infantry forces.
This intimate relationship and collaboration between the resistance and the people is crystalized in the concept of the popular cradle. Not only is there a deep connection between the masses and the revolutionaries in practice, but we can see in the slogan of PIJ the importance of immaterial factors: “Islam as the starting point, jihad as the means, and the liberation of Palestine as the goal”. In a deeply religious society, Islam animates revolutionaries to fight against the “taghut” (the oppressor).
The will of the Palestinian people for national liberation and self-determination is expressed through the society-wide resistance to colonial occupation and genocide. These immaterial factors aredecisive, according to General Giap, Mao Zedong, and Basel Al Araj. The victories in guerilla warfare come at a huge cost, and while I will refrain from romanticizing warfare, it is sufficient to say that Palestine is where guerilla war is being theoretically and practically developed in the 21st century after the failures of pitched battles against the Zionists and their imperialist sponsors in 1948, 1967, and 1973.
Much like Vietnam, Palestine has powerful friends who provide aid. Iran not only supplies the resistance with weapons and open source blueprints to produce weapons domestically, but as of April 14th, provides a steadfast ally, willing to attack the Zionists and keep the flame of liberation alight. While Vietnam injured the imperialist war machine, Palestine will bury it.
Anti-war equals pro-China?
“The US-BBM power-wielders today are not leaving any room for being pro-Filipino anymore”
The “’NO to US-BBM Proxy War‘ Koalisyon ng Mamamayan Kontra Giyera” was launched last April 24, with public intellectuals, political leaders, people’s organizatonions and community groups that number almost 200 at a gathering in the modest venue of the middle-class watering hole in Quezon City Sports Club (unlike events of the US-sponsored CSIS and ADRI events at the plush five-star hotels).
Leading public intellectuals who supported it were former Senator Francisco “Kit” Tatad, former government spokesman Atty. Harry Roque, former undersecretary Loraine Badoy, scientific pollster and columnist Malou Tequia (who stayed at the back of the hall and did not introduce herself), activist and former congressional detainee Ka Eric Celiz, social media scholar-warriors Sassot Rogando and Anna Malindog-Uy via Zoom, a former National Security Council deputy, a retired general and a retired major.
Worthy of special mention is Senator Tatad, today star columnist of the Manila Times and of course a list of “formers” — such as a presidential “spox,” senator and consistent anti-war advocate.
He was a major contributor to the manifesto of the “No to US-BBM Proxy War” initiative but texted at the last minute during the conference that due to momentary physical discomfort with the weather, he sends his support but could not make it on the grand gathering.
The Manila Times reported the event, giving vent to the anti-war perspective of the gathering and the movement it was launching, quoting its manifesto accurately: “The ideals of independence and sovereignty have always been at the core of our national identity, and we refuse to compromise these values in the face of current threats posed by the US-BBM proxy war against China,…” citing Herman Tiu Laurel, of the Asian Century Philippines Strategic Studies Institute.
The manifesto went on to explain the United States has a long history of intervention in the affairs of sovereign nations using economic, political and military means, and focused on the 2011 “pivot to Asia” strategy of the US was aimed at containing China’s rise as a global power with a major part of the strategy utilizing escalation of tensions in the Asia-Pacific employing countries like the Philippines as “strategic pawns in this nihilistic game.”
The manifesto slammed BBM’s acquiescence to the militarization of the South China Sea, signing lopsided agreements on US EDCA bases in the Philippines, consenting to erosion of democratic institutions to impose US control of the domestic scene in the Philippines, and stifling information freedom against the proxy war, pointing to complicity in the US plot to “entangle the country in the US-Japan-Philippine Triad proxy war against China.”
The irony is the title of the article which the editor (as the report itself is very objective and unbiased) tacked on — a jaundiced reference in the story’s headline “Pro-China coalition formed.”
There was nothing pro-China in the content of the report, all that can be read in it is the exposé of strategic US intentions to contain China and its plot to create tension, instability and an eventual proxy war that will harm, if not devastate, the Philippines being used as a war proxy.
Singapore PM Lee Hsien Loong laid down the risk of the Philippines acting as proxy, in a Bloomberg news interview he asks Filipinos “… are you sure you want to be a Battleground?”
Singapore Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan on April 26, 2024, in front of Philippine Foreign Secretary Manalo, warned of a “bleak” future for ASEAN and Indo-Pacific if SCS tensions rise and, not so obliquely, ”.. . no single ASEAN country wants to become a proxy or vassel state of any power…”
The “Pro-China” tag is a propaganda handle of the US-BBM psywar and mass mind manipulation campaign that started in February 2023 when BBM pivoted back to the US after his “secret” deal with the US, trading off Philippine independence for whatever concessions he got (everybody speculates what it is, from hidden wealth to blackmail) from the US warmongers.
The US-BBM power-wielders today are not leaving any room for being pro-Filipino anymore, its either you’re pro-American, which they don’t deny themselves and just don’t mention, or pro-China which is false but no one is given any choice anymore. (rpkapunan@gmail.com)
I knew Singapore’s spending was high per capita but for it be higher in absolute terms than Indonesia and Thailand is insane.
Singapore haters vindicated once again
SEA Headlines
VietnamPlus - Vietnam secures remarkable economic successes since national reunification
Bernama - ASEAN FOUNDATION COLLABORATES WITH HUAWEI TO HARNESS DIGITAL POTENTIAL
The Manila Times - China-Asean interpersonal exchanges pushed
The Bangkok Post - Asean centrality in a changing world
full article
things to different people, but broadly, it can be seen as a regional framework that supports Asean's role as the dominant regional platform to overcome common challenges and engage with external powers.
For citizens of the Asean community, they know its intrinsic value as it has kept the region stable and resilient throughout its more than five decades of existence.
In a fast-changing world, questions are frequently asked about whether the Asean centrality concept should be redefined. Indeed, the concept of Asean centrality was one of the major issues that Asean leaders discussed in the bloc's latest meeting in Hanoi last week.
The discussion on Asean centrality is lively and stimulates questions and even cynicism. At a lunch retreat, Vietnamese scholar Nguyen Hung Son, vice president of the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam, gave a good account of the evolution of Asean centrality. He said back in the 1980s, when the concept of Asean centrality did not exist, the region was depicted as "flying geese", meaning that member states, such as Singapore, the Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia, had the potential to develop quickly.
In the following decade, Asean was perceived as a "driver" for regional cooperation. Questions were raised about whether it was just a driver and whether the passengers (member states) were setting the direction. No matter what the answer was, Asean would go on to assume that it was in the driver's seat, which helped to drive regional processes. Complaints were also made about there being too many hands on the wheel. As Mr Son observed, when Asean entered the 21st century, the bloc turned itself into a "central hub"--akin to an airport able to provide navigation and protection services. But when it came to regional issues that required the bloc's reactions or action, Asean was seen as a "talk shop" or the "Nato" (no action, talk only) of Asia.
Today, Asean centrality is recognised for its part in driving high economic growth in the region. But what form will Asean centrality take over the next 20 years?
Asean is currently wrapping up its new Asean Vision 2045, which envisages a bloc that is future-ready, future-proof, nimble, and agile. In the not-too-distant future, it is projected that the Asean region will become the world's third-most populous region and fourth-largest economy, with a fast-growing middle class that will outweigh the ageing population. Moreover, given its diversity and good connectivity, the region will become an innovative society.
Mr Son said he believes that Asean should be bolder in the future. It should become the leading "goose" of growth, a pioneer in green transformation, digital connection and innovative economics. Asean also can be an example of turning contestation and confrontation in the South China Sea into cooperation and connectivity.
In addition, Asean can serve as an example of how to successfully address multiple crises, such as climate change and water and food security in the Mekong region, thus providing solutions to other regions.
On centrality, Mr Son concluded with a proviso that the concept must not make the bloc complacent; Asean, after all, must not shy away from attempting to lead and shape in future.
In retrospect, similar observations were made in 1977 when Asean opened up for dialogue, market access, and assistance with foreign partners. At that time, Asean officials were only concerned about locations and setting agendas. They insisted all meetings be held in an Asean capital and all agendas fixed by the rotational chair and its members. Back then, the Asean centrality concept was merely a procedural affair.
Subsequent economic cooperation and engagement with the dialogue partners increased the bloc's confidence that its agenda should be further discussed and shared with others. From the 1990s onwards, the bloc has increased Asean-led mechanisms that take in dialogue partners on cooperation on matters related to political/security, economic, social/cultural, and development. At the 9th East Asia Summit in Nay Pyi Taw in 2014, its key agendas were initiated by the US, especially on global health issues and epidemic disease (Ebola).
Because Asean aims to be the main driving force in the region and prevent any hegemony from outside, active engagement from dialogue partners such as the Asean Regional Forum, the East Asia Summit, and the Asean Defence Ministerial Meeting is a must. Luckily, Asean is not a military grouping; it only promotes peace-making and peace-keeping. It has never weaponised conflicts, near or far. Today, Asean centrality has already gained traction as the great powers, particularly the US, China and EU, continue to woo Asean.
During the first special Asean-US summit in California in February 2016, the Obama administration, for the first time, openly supported the Asean centrality and Asean-led mechanism in the evolving regional architecture. Other dialogue partners such as China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand have long accepted Asean centrality as a pivotal tool for forging closer cooperation and partnership between the bloc and dialogue partners.
To make Asean centrality sustainable and relevant, its members' governments and their lawmakers must show goodwill and implement all Asean agreements and policies in a way that only promotes the bloc's centrality.
Meanwhile, younger generations also need to be exposed to Asean affairs in a more holistic way, not fragmented as it is currently. For instance, the region's school children should be able to sing the Asean Way, the bloc's anthem. Activities and programmes promoting the Asean identity and strengthening the sense of belonging should be encouraged.
With its convening and convincing power, Asean centrality 2.0 can go global and create a milestone, especially the efforts to build a better and peaceful world.
Taking advantage of the current situation, with the ongoing desire of the US-China to improve their strained relationship, Asean could provide a neutral venue for them or, for that matter, any conflicting parties to exchange views and mend their relationship because the bloc does not take sides.
The Conversation - Long before politicians called to ‘stop the boats’, First Nations people welcomed arrivals from Indonesia
Antara News - RI, Malaysia propose ASEAN-GCC collaboration for new economic power
Naturally, this is just a question of amazement, as the issue as a whole is not as simple, and civilization cannot be reduced or approached solely from the angle of combating religion.
This was the same conclusion many Marxists and Communists in Nusantara (Maritime Southeast Asia) have also concluded.
And so I get easily bored by a lot of the online anglophone discussions of religion and Islam when these conversations are divorced from the realities that people face on the ground.
That was the largest mistake communists in my country made when it uncritically adopted and applied slogans from other parts of the world without adapting to the conditions found here. The consequences of which are self-evident.
Your weekly Chinese propaganda slop by the Global Times.
Regarding China policy, the Philippines is the outlier in ASEAN
The shift in the attitude of the Philippine government toward the US and China should not come as a great surprise. The Philippines has long been closer to the US than any other ASEAN country. In 1951 it signed a defense treaty with the US, has been host to five US military bases, and the two militaries enjoy a very close relationship. The Philippine government's submission to the Hague tribunal on the South China Sea was a result of close collaboration with the US, which was, in effect, its joint author. However, the unexpected election of Rodrigo Duterte as Philippine president in 2016 changed the dynamic. Duterte refused to support the Hague judgement and instead expressed a desire to distance the Philippines from the US and strengthen ties with China, ultimately undermining the Hague judgement.
After his election as president in 2022, Ferdinand Marcos Jr. initially went through the motions of supporting Duterte's position, but since has engaged in a monumental volte-face. Behind the scenes the US had made a huge effort to secure the shift, which was hardly surprising given that Duterte's position had seriously undermined its policy in the region and weakened its alliance system. Marcos Jr. is the opposite, happy to do America's bidding and be a willing instrument of US policy. In two short years, the Philippines has become a proactive participant in America's military alliance system, agreed to host four new US military bases in addition to the existing five, participated in talks with the US and Japan in Washington earlier in April, and is pursuing an increasingly provocative position against China in the South China Sea.
Since its turn against China, the US has been highly active in seeking to reframe and extend its military alliances in East Asia. It talks of moving from the previous hub and spokes model to a lattice-like network involving closer cooperation between the various partners, as can be seen in the case of South Korea and Japan, with the latter increasingly seen by the US as its crucial partner in the region. This month and next sees the first-ever joint military exercises inside the Philippines's EEZ, involving the US, Australia and the Philippines as well as Japan as an observer, in what can only be regarded as a deliberately provocative act.
Meanwhile, Marcos Jr. has abandoned Duterte's status quo policy on its disputed claims with China in the South China Sea and made the BRP Sierra Madre, the rusting hulk on the submerged Ren'ai Jiao, also known as Second Thomas Shoal, which was deliberately sunk there in 1999, the central focus of its territorial claims. There have been clashes between Chinese coastguard ships and Filipino resupply vessels. There are signs that the Philippines is seeking to transform the reef by transporting construction materials to the site of the BRP Sierra Madre in violation of the previous understanding with China. And there are moves afoot to introduce domestic legislation designed to codify Filipino demands. The US has reaffirmed that Article IV of the 1951 US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty extends to armed attacks on Philippine armed forces, public vessels, or aircraft - including those of its Coast Guard - anywhere in the South China Sea.
The steadily deteriorating relationship between the US and China is liable to rear its head in any number of areas. The South China Sea is hardly a new subject in this context. But it now threatens to return with a new vengeance. The US is not a party to any of these disputes but, by explicitly extending the terms of the Mutual Defense Treaty with the Philippines and to include the latter's territorial claims and BRP Sierra Madre, the US is showing a growing willingness to become directly involved in the territorial disputes in the South China Sea.
In contrast to Marcos Jr., the other nine members of ASEAN continue to enjoy a very positive and expanding relationship with China, including Vietnam, which has a contentious relationship with China regarding the South China Sea. Of the other claimants, Malaysia has become increasingly close to China. The Philippines is the outlier bar none in ASEAN. As we saw earlier, however, the Philippines has become increasingly divided over China. Duterte, who was a far more popular president than Marcos Jr. is, has clashed with Marcos Jr. over China. Meanwhile Duterte's daughter, Sara Duterte-Carpio, Marcos's vice president, is highly popular and will almost certainly stand in the next presidential election in 2028. She is already very much the front-runner and is politically close to her father.
Whatever the future may hold, we are in increasingly dangerous waters. Marcos Jr. is little more than a US puppet, willing, it would seem, to do whatever the US might propose. One of the most concerning aspects of this is the increasing involvement of the Philippines in America's military strategy toward Taiwan. One of America's central concerns about Duterte was that, while he was president, the Philippines would resist being conscripted to its pro-Taiwan positions. That is no longer the case. On the contrary, the Philippines could agree to move closer to Taiwan in the manner of the US' other allies.
Speaking of universities
Universiti Malaya (UM) has issued an apology after an American professor accused Malaysians of advocating for a "second Holocaust" against Jews
UM is one of the most prestigious universities in Malaysia and Southeast Asia.
He took to the platform [Twitter] to share excerpts from the keynote address he gave on Malaysian foreign policy.
"'A country whose political leaders advocate [for] a second Holocaust against the Jewish people will never be a serious player in world affairs, and will certainly never be a friend or partner of the US.' From my keynote address [on Tuesday] in KL on Malaysian foreign policy," Gilley wrote on X.
Lol. Lmao.
and will certainly never be a friend or partner of the US
"UM will continue to support the government's stance against any connections with Israel and fully endorse efforts to recognise Palestine as a legitimate independent state," added the statement.
Platforming a Zionist in Malaysia is like platforming a Palestinian in Germany.
Meanwhile, Gilley, who has since left Malaysia, claiming he was "one step ahead of the Islamo-fascist mob whipped up by the government", has now started a GoFundMe fundraiser to pay for his flight tickets
Islamo-fascist
Yes of course but this falls into the larger plan of doubling the state's high-manufacturing value added contribution to GDP. I guess I could've made that clearer.
SEA Headlines
Reuters - Malaysia plans Southeast Asia's largest integrated circuit design park
Let’s see if the government’s plans for “re-industrialization” pans out.
VNA - India’s trade deficit with ASEAN widens
Bloomberg - Why Indonesia Is China’s New Best Friend in Southeast Asia
VNA - Vietnamese, Chinese localities enhance cooperation
The Nation - New Chinese EV manufacturer Chery to invest in Thailland
Chery is the 8th EV maker from China to be approved following BYD, MG, Great Wall Motor, Changan Automobile, GAC Aion, NETA and Foton, Narit Therdsteerasukdi, BOI secretary-general, said on Monday.
The company, which exported 1.8 million units last year, aims to use Thailand as a production base to meet the domestic demand for right-hand drive EVs, as well as export the vehices to ASEAN, Australia and the Middle East.